Whereas, the Select Committee on Ethics on December 1, 1992,
initiated a Preliminary Inquiry (hereafter "Inquiry") into
allegations of sexual misconduct by Senator Bob Packwood, and
subsequently, on February 4, 1993, expanded the scope of its Inquiry
to include allegations of attempts to intimidate and discredit the
alleged victims, and misuse of official staff in attempts to
intimidate and discredit, and notified Senator Packwood of such
actions; and

Whereas, on December 15, 1993, in light of sworn testimony that
Senator Packwood may have altered evidence relevant to the
Committee's Inquiry, the Chairman and Vice-Chairman determined as an
inherent part of its Inquiry to inquire into the integrity of
evidence sought by the Committee and into any information that anyone
may have endeavored to obstruct its Inquiry, and notified Senator
Packwood of such action: and

Whereas, on May 11, 1994, upon completion of the Committee staff's
review of Senator Packwood's typewritten diaries, the Committee
expanded its Inquiry again to include additional areas of potential
misconduct by Senator Packwood, including solicitation of financial
support for his spouse from persons with an interest in legislation,
in exchange, gratitude, or recognition for his official acts;

Whereas, the Committee staff has conducted the Inquiry under the
direction of the Members of the Committee; and

Whereas, the Committee has received the Report of its staff relating
to its Inquiry concerning Senator Packwood; and

Whereas, on the basis of evidence received during the Inquiry, there
are possible violations within the Committee's jurisdiction as
contemplated in Section 2(a)(1) of S. Res. 338, 88th Congress, as
amended:

It is therefore Resolved:

I. That the Committee makes the following determinations regarding
the matters set forth above:

(a) With respect to sexual misconduct, the Committee has carefully
considered evidence, including sworn testimony, witness interviews,
and documentary evidence, relating to the following allegations:

(1) That in 1990, in his Senate office in Washington, D.C., Senator
Packwood grabbed a staff member by the shoulders and kissed her on
the lips;

(2) That in 1985, at a function in Bend, Oregon, Senator Packwood
fondled a campaign worker as they danced. Later that year, in Eugene,
Oregon, in saying goodnight and thank you to her, Senator Packwood
grabbed the campaign worker's face with his hands, pulled her towards
him, and kissed her on the mouth, forcing his tongue into her mouth;

(3) That in 1981 or 1982, in his Senate office in Washington, D.C.,
Senator Packwood squeezed the arms of a lobbyist, leaned over and
kissed her on the mouth;

(4) That in 1981, in the basement of the Capitol, Senator Packwood
walked a former staff assistant into a room, where he grabbed her
with both hands in her hair and kissed her, forcing his tongue into
her mouth;

(5) That in 1980, in a parking lot in Eugene, Oregon, Senator
Packwood pulled a campaign worker toward him, put his arms around
her, and kissed her, forcing his tongue in her mouth; he also invited
her to his motel room;

(6) That in 1980 or early 1981, at a hotel in Portland, Oregon, on
two separate occasions, Senator Packwood kissed a desk clerk who
worked for the hotel;

(7) That in 1980, in his Senate office in Washington, D.C., Senator
Packwood grabbed a staff member by the shoulders, pushed her down on
a couch, and kissed her on the lips; the staff member tried several
times to get up, but Senator Packwood repeatedly pushed her back on
the couch;

(8) That in 1979, Senator Packwood walked into the office of another
Senator in Washington, D.C., started talking with a staff member, and
suddenly leaned down and kissed the staff member on the lips;

(9) That in 1977, in an elevator in the Capitol, and on numerous
occasions, Senator Packwood grabbed the elevator operator by the
shoulders, pushed her to the wall of the elevator and kissed her on
the lips. Senator Packwood also came to this person's home, kissed
her, and asked her to make love with him;

(10) That in 1977, in a motel room while attending the Dorchester
Conference in coastal Oregon, Senator Packwood grabbed a prospective
employee by her shoulders, pulled her to him, and kissed her:

(11) That in 1975, in his Senate office in Washington, D.C., Senator
Packwood grabbed the staff assistant referred to in (4), pinned her
against a wall or desk, held her hair with one hand, bending her head
backwards, fondling her with his other hand, and kissed her, forcing
his tongue into her mouth;

(12) That in 1975, in his Senate office in Washington, D.C., Senator
Packwood grabbed a staff assistant around her shoulders, held her
tightly while pressing his body into hers, and kissed her on the
mouth;

(13) That in the early 1970's, in his Senate office in Portland,
Oregon, Senator Packwood chased a staff assistant around a desk;

(14) That in 1970, in a hotel restaurant in Portland, Oregon, Senator
Packwood ran his hand up the leg of a dining room hostess, and
touched her crotch area;

(15) That in 1970, in his Senate office in Washington, D.C., Senator
Packwood grabbed a staff member by the shoulders and kissed her on
the mouth;

(16) That in 1969, in his Senate office in Washington, D.C., Senator
Packwood made suggestive comments to a prospective employee;

(17) That in 1969, at his home, Senator Packwood grabbed an employee
of another Senator who was babysitting for him, rubbed her shoulders
and back, and kissed her on the mouth. He also put his arm around her
and touched her leg as he drove her home;

(18) That in 1969, in his Senate office in Portland, Oregon, Senator
Packwood grabbed a staff worker, stood on her feet, grabbed her hair,
forcibly pulled her head back, and kissed her on the mouth, forcing
his tongue into her mouth. Senator Packwood also reached under her
skirt and grabbed at her undergarments.

Based upon the Committee's consideration of evidence related to each
of these allegations, the Committee finds that there is substantial
credible evidence that provides substantial cause for the Committee
to conclude that violations within the Committee's jurisdiction as
contemplated in Section 2(a)(1) of S. Res. 338, 88th Congress, as
amended, may have occurred; to wit, that Senator Packwood may have
abused his United States Senate Office by improper conduct which has
brought discredit upon the United States Senate, by engaging in a
pattern of sexual misconduct between 1969 and 1990.

Notwithstanding this conclusion, for purposes of making a
determination at the end of its Investigation with regard to a
possible pattern of conduct involving sexual misconduct, some Members
of the Committee have serious concerns about the weight, if any, that
should be accorded to evidence of conduct alleged to have occurred
prior to 1976, the year in which the federal court recognized quid
pro quo sexual harassment as discrimination under the Civil Rights
Act, and the Senate passed a resolution prohibiting sex
discrimination in the United States Senate, and taking into account
the age of the allegations.

(b) With respect to the Committee's inherent responsibility to
inquire into the integrity of the evidence sought by the Committee as
part of its Inquiry, the Committee finds, within the meaning of
Section 2(a)(1) of S. Res. 338, 88th Congress, as amended, that there
is substantial credible evidence that provides substantial cause for
the Committee to conclude that improper conduct reflecting upon the
Senate, and/or possible violations of federal law, i.e., Title 18,
United States Code, Section 1505, may have occurred. To wit:

Between some time in December 1992 and some time in November 1993,
Senator Packwood intentionally altered diary materials that he knew
or should have known the Committee had sought or would likely seek as
part of its Preliminary Inquiry begun on December 1, 1992.

(c) With respect to possible solicitation of financial support for
his spouse from persons with an interest in legislation, the
Committee has carefully considered evidence, including sworn
testimony and documentary evidence, relating to Senator Packwood's
contacts with the following persons:

(1) A registered foreign agent representing a client who had
particular interests before the Committee on Finance and the
Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation;

(2) A businessman who had particular interests before the Committee
on Commerce, Science and Transportation;

(3) A businessman who had particular interests before the Committee
on Finance and the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation;

(4) A registered lobbyist representing clients who had particular
interests before the Committee on Finance and the Committee on
Commerce, Science and Transportation;

(5) A registered lobbyist representing a client who had particular
interests before the Committee on Finance.

Based upon the Committee's consideration of this evidence, the
Committee finds that there is substantial credible evidence that
provides substantial cause for the Committee to conclude that
violations within the Committee's jurisdiction as contemplated in
Section 2(a)(1) of S. Res. 338, 88th Congress, as amended, may have
occurred, to wit: Senator Packwood may have abused his United States
Senate Office through improper conduct which has brought discredit
upon the United States Senate by inappropriately linking personal
financial gain to his official position in that he solicited or
otherwise encouraged offers of financial assistance from persons who
had a particular interest in legislation or issues that Senator
Packwood could influence.

II. That the Committee, pursuant to Committee Supplementary
Procedural Rules 3(d)(5) and 4(f)(4), shall proceed to an
Investigation under Committee Supplementary Procedural Rule 5; and

III. That Senator Packwood shall be given timely written notice of
this Resolution and the evidence supporting it, and informed of a
respondent's rights pursuant to the Rules of the Committee.

-----
Brought to you by - The 'Lectric Law Library
The Net's Finest Legal Resource For Legal Pros & Laypeople Alike.
https://www.lectlaw.com

* * * * * * * * * *No one connected with the 'Lectric Law Library, including Sponsors, Advertisers, & Content Providers,
necessarily Endorses, Warrants or Approves of any of its material. Also, Library content is NOT meant
to provide Specific Legal Advice, or to Solicit or Establish Any Kind of Professional-Client Relationship.